Brian Swale wrote:
> Joel wrote
>> I increased the quality settings. I hope you will find the images to
>> be better. Thanks for taking the trouble to comment.
>>
> I looked at every image again. I used browser Opera 3.62 which loads the
> site easily. It also has the very useful facility of reporting the bytes
> loaded on
> every re-fresh and new page.
>
> I can see that it looks like the maximum size per image is about 70 kb, and
> quite a few are only about 40 kb; and it seems to me that these could benefit
> from a little more size.
>
Full circle. I commented on the ease of use of Joel's old site. Chris
nagged more gently. Joel found and used JAlbum. I liked what I saw in
his new gallery. I looked at JAlbum and found it had improved a lot
since I looked before. I tried a gallery in it, but found the downsized
images look crummy......
What was happening was that I had already prepared the display JPEGs as
I wanted them. The default image size in JA was smaller than that, so it
was resizing and resharpening.
The solution was to set a display size larger than the actual images. JA
doesn't try to upsize, so it simply uses the already prepared images.
I don't know if this applies, Joel. Just trying to help.
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|